Many closures or containers are provided with some type of child-resistant mechanism to prevent removal of the closure absent some manipulation of the closure or container beyond the normal rotational motion. For example, many closures include inner and outer parts that cooperate to allow closure of the container via simple rotation, but require axial depression of the closure to effect counter-rotation and removal of the closure. Other closures or containers include mechanisms that require radial depression of part of the closure for removal. Often these known mechanisms suffer from several drawbacks. While making the closure difficult for a child to remove, many child-resistant mechanisms also create difficulties for adults, in particular the elderly or those suffering from arthritis or similar debilitating conditions. In addition, some child-proof mechanisms have a tendency to fail after repeated use. In many cases, efforts to overcome these difficulties result in closures or containers which are relatively complicated and expensive to manufacture.
Similarly, closures or containers often include tamper-indicating mechanisms. In some cases, tamper-indication is provided by a band disposed on the bottom edge of a closure. Attempted removal or tampering of the closure causes the band to separate from the closure skirt, providing an indication of the tampering. The band may include a number of upwardly and inwardly extending tabs that abut against a shoulder on the neck of the container. When the closure is removed, the tabs contact the shoulder to retain the band on the container. The band generally separates from the skirt along some sort of frangible line.
In some cases, closures or containers include both child-resistant and tamper indicating mechanisms. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,752,014 to House et al. describes a closure including a push tab disposed on the skirt. In order to rotate the closure to remove the closure, the push tab must be depressed radially inwardly. At the same time, depression of the push tab causes a pair of fragile webs to break, thereby providing tamper indication. In this case, the lack of a tamper-indicating band may cause some consumers to assume that tamper indication is not present. In addition, even if the tamper-indicating function of the webs is deduced by the consumer, the small size of the webs makes it difficult at first glance to determine whether tampering has occurred. Other combined child-resistant and tamper indicating closures or containers suffer similar problems or problems discussed above. In addition, in many cases known child-resistant mechanisms and tamper indicating mechanism are not complimentary, requiring complicated designs to incorporate the two features that increase manufacturing costs and risk of failure.